21–30 of 31 posts
https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/bypn9cdrc
How Intel's $108 billion buyback gambit backfired—a cautionary tale for tech giants Intel’s focus on stock price over innovation left it playing catch-up in the AI race—and tech leaders should take note.
Buybacks artificially pumped the share price, which means any correction is/has been very brutal, more "bubble" like.
Dylan Patel comes to essentially the same conclusions (and this is a better post I think): https://semianalysis.com/2024/12/09/intel-on-the-brink-of-de... The problem is there are two distinct objectives: 1. Maximise shareholder value 2. Maintain and extend Intel's (close to) leading-edge fab capability. These are not necessarily consistent! The Intel Board (bad as it is) is trying to deliver 1. and probably now does…
Thanks, good reading. Sharp retrospective and analysis, hopeful blueprint for the future:
"""
Intel Foundry won’t be laden with Intel’s lagging product team, Mobileye, or Altera. Intel Foundry will have one clear function, and it’s vital to national security and the future of America and the West.
Who should lead the charge here? Maybe a “Chip Czar” charged with restoring American logic prowess. We know someone with a great CV who has just become freed up for new opportunities…
"""
Folks are really cheering on Intel to win, because no one wants to be left holding the bag. We all bought Intel because we all thought it was ol’ faithful, but they’ve really, REALLY shit the bed.
nonsense. Just buy AMD from now on, then ARM.
Folks are really cheering on Intel to win, because no one wants to be left holding the bag. We all bought Intel because we all thought it was ol’ faithful, but they’ve really, REALLY shit the bed.
nonsense. Just buy AMD from now on, then ARM.
Apple and Nvidia should be leading the charge here. They're the ones that are both vulnerable to a TSMC squeeze and have the resources to make a difference.
It appears that Nvidia is looking to manufacture the low end of their upcoming GPU's on Samsung, so they're doing at least something. But Apple appears to be doubling down on TSMC via exclusive contracts.
Dylan Patel comes to essentially the same conclusions (and this is a better post I think): https://semianalysis.com/2024/12/09/intel-on-the-brink-of-de... The problem is there are two distinct objectives: 1. Maximise shareholder value 2. Maintain and extend Intel's (close to) leading-edge fab capability. These are not necessarily consistent! The Intel Board (bad as it is) is trying to deliver 1. and probably now does…
> Dylan Patel comes to essentially the same conclusions (and this is a better post I think): https://semianalysis.com/2024/12/09/intel-on-the-brink-of-de... Thanks, good reading. Sharp retrospective and analysis, hopeful blueprint for the future: """ Intel Foundry won’t be laden with Intel’s lagging product team, Mobileye, or Altera. Intel Foundry will have one clear function, and it’s vital to national security and…
So How are all of you enjoying this new Guided Age of Technology Trusts and that new age that started in earnest beginning with the 1980 election and is really coming into its own with the election of 2024! Say hello to the Robber Barron Cabinet come Jan 20th 2024, and maybe 2029 will be a year not to dissimilar from the one that occurred one century before!
> up to that point most new processors came with their own instruction set Kind of. 8080 and 8085 share also the same ISA. Other families that did that were the 6502 (the 6510, the 6504), Z-80 (Hitachi's HD64180, which became the Z-180, Z-280, R800), and Texas' TMS9900, which was part of a whole family that spanned from the ill-fated TI-99/4 to the TI-990 minicomputers.
The 8088 and 8080 are not binary compatible, they're mostly source compatible.
What if they're wrong, and there's a much, much simpler architecture that could be found, that could scale almost infinitely, and make better use of Dennard scaling?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't say that - I mentioned that, previously, 8080 and 8085 shared the same ISA with different implementations.
And I didn't contradict you, I clarified.
Still, I wish the ia432 succeeded, or the TMS9900 was picked for the IBM PC. Would be a much nicer world.